Legal Opinion

Sedillo v. City of Portland

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided March 28, 1963PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDenecke, J.

The plaintiff was injured in a rear-end collision with a car operated by the defendant Selfridge. The jury awarded him $500 for his injuries.

The court withdrew from the consideration of the jury an allegation of damages that a pre-existing ulcer was aggravated by the collision. This withdrawal is assigned as error.

*30Appellant’s position is:

“Even though the doctors [testifying on plaintiff’s behalf] testified that in their opinion with reasonable medical certainty the ulcer was formed after the accident, they could not say this definitely, and the jury could have chosen to disbelieve the…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Mullins v. ROWE ET UXOregon Supreme Court · 1960
  2. Baden v. Sunset Fuel Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1960
  3. Stein v. HandyOregon Supreme Court · 1957
  4. State v. ReedOregon Supreme Court · 1908
  5. Forest Products Co. v. Dant & Russell, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1926

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Sandford v. Chevrolet Division of General MotorsOregon Supreme Court · 1982
  2. Saum v. BonarOregon Supreme Court · 1971
  3. Flansberg v. PaulsonOregon Supreme Court · 1965
  4. Goldstein v. SklarSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1966
  5. DeMaris v. WhittierOregon Supreme Court · 1977

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API